In Milwaukie and Minnesota Railroad Company and Fleming v. Soutter, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a railroad company could be held liable for damages caused by its negligence in failing to provide sufficient warning of an approaching train. The court found that the railroad had indeed been negligent in not providing adequate warning of the approach of their train, as required by law, and thus were liable for any resulting damages suffered by Mr. Soutter due to this negligence. In reaching this decision, the court noted that it is essential for railroads to take all necessary precautions when operating trains near populated areas so as to avoid potential harm or injury from their operations. As such, they must ensure proper warnings are given prior to passing through these areas so that people can safely move out of harm's way if need be.

In the dissenting opinion of Milwaukie and Minnesota Railroad Company and Fleming v. Soutter, Justice Field argued that the court should have found in favor of the appellants due to their right to a lien on property under state law. He believed that this was an established legal principle which had been recognized by numerous courts throughout history, including those in Wisconsin where this case originated from. Furthermore, he noted that it was not necessary for Congress to pass any legislation granting such rights as they were already provided for under existing laws. Therefore, he concluded that since no federal statute existed prohibiting or limiting these rights then they should be upheld and enforced accordingly.